DOCSLIB.ORG

Flight Testing Angle-Of-Attack Warning Combinations on Part 23 Aircraft

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Flight Testing Angle-of-Attack Warning Combinations on Part 23 Aircraft Jennifer Grey Geehan Bachelor of Science Aerospace Engineering Florida Institute of Technology A thesis submitted to the College of Engineering and Computing at Florida Institute of Technology in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of: Master of Science in Flight Test Engineering Melbourne, Florida December 2017 Abstract Flight Testing Angle-of-Attack Warning Combinations on Part 23 Aircraft Jennifer Grey Geehan Advisor: Brian A. Kish, Ph.D. The high number of accidents involving General Aviation (GA) aircraft leads to a need for improved methods to warn pilots of high angles of attack (AOA) and impending stall. Such methods must be certified by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) under Federal Aviation Regulations Part 23 regarding their effectiveness in preventing departures from controlled flight. Therefore, methods of compliance must be developed to certify Part 23 aircraft equipped with AOA warning or limiting systems. The research objectives were to (a) determine methods for the evaluation of AOA warning and limiting systems and to (b) evaluate the effectiveness of baseline combinations of such systems. The warning systems included visual, aural, and haptic feedback cues. The work performed in this study was the design, implementation, and testing of an AOA indicator that intuitively displayed the aircraft’s AOA and its current flap configuration. Also tested were aural alerts that informed the pilot of both the state of the aircraft and the actions needed to prevent further energy decay. Finally, an active stick that provided haptic feedback by shaking, pushing, and stepwise increasing the stick force depending on AOA was tested. These systems were evaluated using both a traditional stall matrix approach and an innovative AOA tracking task. The test aircraft used was the Technical University of Munich’s fly-by-wire DA42. The key results were that the stall matrix was found to be an effective means to establish compliance, while the AOA tracking task did not produce the desired repeatability and consistency and could potentially be unsafe. However, the tracking task was effective in monopolizing pilot awareness and this lack of situational awareness is believed to be a major cause in fatal GA accidents. From the visual, aural, iii and haptic feedback cues evaluated, all evaluation pilots preferred the AOA indicator developed for the project over current off-the-shelf products, the human recorded voice was the preferred aural alert, and the stick shaker was found to be very effective. The stick pusher, the only active system tested, needs further investigation for safe operation at low altitudes. iv Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1 Materials and Methods .............................................................................................................. 11 2.1 Test Apparatus ................................................................................................................ 11 2.2 AOA Indicator ................................................................................................................ 16 2.3 Aural Cues ...................................................................................................................... 19 2.4 The Active Stick ............................................................................................................. 20 2.4.1 Stick Shaker ............................................................................................................. 26 2.4.2 Stick Pusher ............................................................................................................. 26 2.5 Development of Tracking Task ...................................................................................... 27 2.4 Creating the Test plan ..................................................................................................... 30 Results ....................................................................................................................................... 34 3.1 Data Analysis .................................................................................................................. 34 3.2 Results ............................................................................................................................. 35 3.2.1 Qualitative Results ................................................................................................... 38 3.2.2 Quantitative Results ................................................................................................. 40 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................... 59 4.1 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 59 4.2 Future Work .................................................................................................................... 61 References: ................................................................................................................................ 62 Appendices ................................................................................................................................ 64 Appendix A: Matlab Code for Generating Plots ................................................................... 64 Appendix B: Pilot Survey and Data ...................................................................................... 69 Appendix C: Software Changes and Flight Log ................................................................... 71 Appendix D: Stall Test Matrix .............................................................................................. 72 Appendix E: Test Cards: 3 July 2017 ................................................................................... 73 v List of Figures Figure 1: Aircraft Upset Event Types per Flight Phase 2011-2015 [2] ...................................... 1 Figure 2: AOA Flow and Lift Curve [7] ..................................................................................... 3 Figure 3: Probability of detection as a function of time available for search [10] ...................... 5 Figure 4: Alpha Systems AOA Indicators [11] ........................................................................... 6 Figure 5: Pilot Learning Curve [10] ............................................................................................ 9 Figure 6: Test Aircraft .............................................................................................................. 12 Figure 7: Hangar Control Room ............................................................................................... 14 Figure 8: DA42 Standard Stall Speed [16] ............................................................................... 15 Figure 9: AOA Indicator Iterations ........................................................................................... 18 Figure 10: AOA Indicator/EFCS Buttons ................................................................................. 19 Figure 11: Active stick force curve example (Koschlik [17]) ................................................... 22 Figure 12: Active Stick Installed .............................................................................................. 25 Figure 13: FTE Station.............................................................................................................. 26 Figure 14: Pitch and roll axis sum-of-sines command signals [19] .......................................... 27 Figure 15: Versions 1 and 2 of AOA Tracking Task ................................................................ 28 Figure 16: Tracking Task in Cockpit ........................................................................................ 29 Figure 17: Test Area [20] .......................................................................................................... 31 Figure 18: AOA change with Time........................................................................................... 41 Figure 19: Pilot A Straight Stalls .............................................................................................. 42 Figure 20: July 10 Flight 1 Pilot B Stall Matrix ....................................................................... 43 Figure 21: Tracking Task Version 1 July 5 ............................................................................... 44 Figure 22:Overall Simulated Traffic Pattern ............................................................................ 45 Figure 23: Overall Simulated Traffic Pattern ........................................................................... 46 Figure 24:Pattern 1 .................................................................................................................... 47 Figure 25: Pattern 1 ................................................................................................................... 48 Figure 26: Pattern 2 ................................................................................................................... 49 Figure 27: Pattern 2 ................................................................................................................... 49 Figure 28: Pattern 3 ..................................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Enhancing General Aviation Aircraft Safety with Supplemental Angle of Attack Systems

    Enhancing General Aviation Aircraft Safety with Supplemental Angle of Attack Systems

    University of North Dakota UND Scholarly Commons Theses and Dissertations Theses, Dissertations, and Senior Projects January 2015 Enhancing General Aviation Aircraft aS fety With Supplemental Angle Of Attack Systems David E. Kugler Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.und.edu/theses Recommended Citation Kugler, David E., "Enhancing General Aviation Aircraft aS fety With Supplemental Angle Of Attack Systems" (2015). Theses and Dissertations. 1793. https://commons.und.edu/theses/1793 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, and Senior Projects at UND Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of UND Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ENHANCING GENERAL AVIATION AIRCRAFT SAFETY WITH SUPPLEMENTAL ANGLE OF ATTACK SYSTEMS by David E. Kugler Bachelor of Science, United States Air Force Academy, 1983 Master of Arts, University of North Dakota, 1991 Master of Science, University of North Dakota, 2011 A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the University of North Dakota in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Grand Forks, North Dakota May 2015 Copyright 2015 David E. Kugler ii PERMISSION Title Enhancing General Aviation Aircraft Safety With Supplemental Angle of Attack Systems Department Aviation Degree Doctor of Philosophy In presenting this dissertation in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a graduate degree from the University of North Dakota, I agree that the library of this University shall make it freely available for inspection. I further agree that permission for extensive copying for scholarly purposes may be granted by the professor who supervised my dissertation work or, in his absence, by the Chairperson of the department or the dean of the School of Graduate Studies.
  • Sailing for Performance

    Sailing for Performance

    SD2706 Sailing for Performance Objective: Learn to calculate the performance of sailing boats Today: Sailplan aerodynamics Recap User input: Rig dimensions ‣ P,E,J,I,LPG,BAD Hull offset file Lines Processing Program, LPP: ‣ Example.bri LPP_for_VPP.m rigdata Hydrostatic calculations Loading condition ‣ GZdata,V,LOA,BMAX,KG,LCB, hulldata ‣ WK,LCG LCF,AWP,BWL,TC,CM,D,CP,LW, T,LCBfpp,LCFfpp Keel geometry ‣ TK,C Solve equilibrium State variables: Environmental variables: solve_Netwon.m iterative ‣ VS,HEEL ‣ TWS,TWA ‣ 2-dim Netwon-Raphson iterative method Hydrodynamics Aerodynamics calc_hydro.m calc_aero.m VS,HEEL dF,dM Canoe body viscous drag Lift ‣ RFC ‣ CL Residuals Viscous drag Residuary drag calc_residuals_Newton.m ‣ RR + dRRH ‣ CD ‣ dF = FAX + FHX (FORCE) Keel fin drag ‣ dM = MH + MR (MOMENT) Induced drag ‣ RF ‣ CDi Centre of effort Centre of effort ‣ CEH ‣ CEA FH,CEH FA,CEA The rig As we see it Sail plan ≈ Mainsail + Jib (or genoa) + Spinnaker The sail plan is defined by: IMSYC-66 P Mainsail hoist [m] P E Boom leech length [m] BAD Boom above deck [m] I I Height of fore triangle [m] J Base of fore triangle [m] LPG Perpendicular of jib [m] CEA CEA Centre of effort [m] R Reef factor [-] J E LPG BAD D Sailplan modelling What is the purpose of the sails on our yacht? To maximize boat speed on a given course in a given wind strength ‣ Max driving force, within our available righting moment Since: We seek: Fx (Thrust vs Resistance) ‣ Driving force, FAx Fy (Side forces, Sails vs. Keel) ‣ Heeling force, FAy (Mx (Heeling-righting moment)) ‣ Heeling arm, CAE Aerodynamics of sails A sail is: ‣ a foil with very small thickness and large camber, ‣ with flexible geometry, ‣ usually operating together with another sail ‣ and operating at a large variety of angles of attack ‣ Environment L D V Each vertical section is a differently cambered thin foil Aerodynamics of sails TWIST due to e.g.
  • Initial Piloted Simulation Study of Geared Flap R Tilt-Wing V/STOL

    Initial Piloted Simulation Study of Geared Flap R Tilt-Wing V/STOL

    R NASA Technical Memorandum 103872 Initial Piloted Simulation Study of Geared Flap Control r Tilt-Wing V/STOL Aircraft Lourdes M. Guerrero and Lloyd Da Corliss [NASA-TM-103872) INITIAL PILOTED N93-10741 ~~~U~A~~~NSTUDY QF GEARft) FLAP ~Q~~~~~ fOR TILT-WING V/STOL AIRCRAFT (NASA) 39 p Wncfas 63/08 01180?6 October 1991 National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA Technical Memorandum 103872 Initial Piloted Simulation Study of Geared Flap Control For Tilt-Wing V/STOL Aircraft Lourdes M. Guerrero and Lloyd D Corliss, Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California October 1991 National Aeronautics and Space Administration Ames Research Center Moffett Field, Califorrlia94035 -1000 SUMMARY A simulation model was developed for piloted evaluations of a representative tilt-wing V/STOL (Vertical/Short Takeoff and Landing) aircraft. Using this model an initial tilt-wing simulation study was conducted in 1990 on the Ames Vertical Motion Simulator In the past, all tilt-wing aircraft have required a horizontal tail rotor or reaction jets to provide pitch control in hover and low speeds. To alleviate this need, devices such as monocyclic propellers and a geared flap have been proposed for providing control at low speed. The geared flap is the sub- ject of this study and it is compared to the conventional flap used in previous tilt-wing aircraft. Objectives of the study were to simulate a tilt-wing V/STOL aircraft, to evaluate and compare the control effectiveness and handling qualities of both a conventional (programmed flap) and the geared flap control configurations, and to determine the feasibility of eliminating the horizontal tail rotor or reaction jets of prior designs through the use of the geared flap control configuration.
  • American Eagle Flight 3008 ALPA Submission

    American Eagle Flight 3008 ALPA Submission

    SUBMISSION OF THE AIR LINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION TO THE NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD REGARDING AN INCIDENT INVOLVING AMERICAN EAGLE AIRLINES FLIGHT 3008 Santa Maria, CA January 2, 2006 1 SUMMARY..........................................................................................................................................3 2 HISTORY OF FLIGHT......................................................................................................................3 3 WEATHER ..........................................................................................................................................5 3.1 WEATHER RADAR ........................................................................................................................ 5 3.2 AIRMETS ................................................................................................................................... 5 3.3 CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................5 4 OPERATIONS.....................................................................................................................................5 4.1 DEFERRED DE-ICE TIMER CONTROL SYSTEM .............................................................................. 5 4.2 STALL WARNING SYSTEM............................................................................................................ 6 4.3 STALL RECOVERY TRAINING ......................................................................................................
  • Aerodynamic Characteristics of Naca 0012 Airfoil Section at Different Angles of Attack

    Aerodynamic Characteristics of Naca 0012 Airfoil Section at Different Angles of Attack

    AERODYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF NACA 0012 AIRFOIL SECTION AT DIFFERENT ANGLES OF ATTACK SUPREETH NARASIMHAMURTHY GRADUATE STUDENT 1327291 Table of Contents 1) Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...1 2) Methodology……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….3 3) Results……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………......5 4) Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..9 5) References…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………10 List of Figures Figure 1: Basic nomenclature of an airfoil………………………………………………………………………………………………...1 Figure 2: Computational domain………………………………………………………………………………………………………………4 Figure 3: Static Pressure Contours for different angles of attack……………………………………………………………..5 Figure 4: Velocity Magnitude Contours for different angles of attack………………………………………………………………………7 Fig 5: Variation of Cl and Cd with alpha……………………………………………………………………………………………………8 Figure 6: Lift Coefficient and Drag Coefficient Ratio for Re = 50000…………………………………………………………8 List of Tables Table 1: Lift and Drag coefficients as calculated from lift and drag forces from formulae given above……7 Introduction It is a fact of common experience that a body in motion through a fluid experience a resultant force which, in most cases is mainly a resistance to the motion. A class of body exists, However for which the component of the resultant force normal to the direction to the motion is many time greater than the component resisting the motion, and the possibility of the flight of an airplane depends on the use of the body of this class for wing structure. Airfoil is such an aerodynamic shape that when it moves through air, the air is split and passes above and below the wing. The wing’s upper surface is shaped so the air rushing over the top speeds up and stretches out. This decreases the air pressure above the wing. The air flowing below the wing moves in a comparatively straighter line, so its speed and air pressure remain the same.
  • Aerodynamics of High-Performance Wing Sails

    Aerodynamics of High-Performance Wing Sails

    Aerodynamics of High-Performance Wing Sails J. otto Scherer^ Some of tfie primary requirements for tiie design of wing sails are discussed. In particular, ttie requirements for maximizing thrust when sailing to windward and tacking downwind are presented. The results of water channel tests on six sail section shapes are also presented. These test results Include the data for the double-slotted flapped wing sail designed by David Hubbard for A. F. Dl Mauro's lYRU "C" class catamaran Patient Lady II. Introduction The propulsion system is probably the single most neglect­ ed area of yacht design. The conventional triangular "soft" sails, while simple, practical, and traditional, are a long way from being aerodynamically desirable. The aerodynamic driving force of the sails is, of course, just as large and just as important as the hydrodynamic resistance of the hull. Yet, designers will go to great lengths to fair hull lines and tank test hull shapes, while simply drawing a triangle on the plans to define the sails. There is no question in my mind that the application of the wealth of available airfoil technology will yield enormous gains in yacht performance when applied to sail design. Re­ cent years have seen the application of some of this technolo­ gy in the form of wing sails on the lYRU "C" class catamar­ ans. In this paper, I will review some of the aerodynamic re­ quirements of yacht sails which have led to the development of the wing sails. For purposes of discussion, we can divide sail require­ ments into three points of sailing: • Upwind and close reaching.
  • Vertical Motion Simulator Experiment on Stall Recovery Guidance

    Vertical Motion Simulator Experiment on Stall Recovery Guidance

    NASA/TP{2017{219733 Vertical Motion Simulator Experiment on Stall Recovery Guidance Stefan Schuet National Aeronautics and Space Administration Thomas Lombaerts Stinger Ghaffarian Technologies, Inc. Vahram Stepanyan Universities Space Research Association John Kaneshige, Kimberlee Shish, Peter Robinson National Aeronautics and Space Administration Gordon Hardy Retired Research Test Pilot Science Applications International Corporation October 2017 NASA STI Program. in Profile Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated • CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. to the advancement of aeronautics and space Collected papers from scientific and science. The NASA scientific and technical technical conferences, symposia, seminars, information (STI) program plays a key part or other meetings sponsored or in helping NASA maintain this important co-sponsored by NASA. role. • SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientific, The NASA STI Program operates under the technical, or historical information from auspices of the Agency Chief Information NASA programs, projects, and missions, Officer. It collects, organizes, provides for often concerned with subjects having archiving, and disseminates NASA's STI. substantial public interest. The NASA STI Program provides access to the NASA Aeronautics and Space Database • TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. English- and its public interface, the NASA Technical language translations of foreign scientific Report Server, thus providing one of the and technical material pertinent to largest collection of aeronautical and space NASA's mission. science STI in the world. Results are Specialized services also include organizing published in both non-NASA channels and and publishing research results, distributing by NASA in the NASA STI Report Series, specialized research announcements and which includes the following report types: feeds, providing information desk and • TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of personal search support, and enabling data completed research or a major significant exchange services.
  • For Improved Airplane Performance

    For Improved Airplane Performance

    BLENDED WINGLETS FORFOR IMPROVEDIMPROVED AIRPLANEAIRPLANE PERFORMANCEPERFORMANCE New blended winglets on the Boeing Business Jet and the 737-800 commercial airplane offer operational benefits to customers. Besides giving the airplanes a distinctive appear- ance, the winglets create more efficient flight characteristics in cruise and during takeoff and climbout, which translate into additional range with the same fuel and payload. ROBERT FAYE ROBERT LAPRETE MICHAEL WINTER TECHNICAL DIRECTOR ASSOCIATE TECHNICAL FELLOW PRINCIPAL ENGINEER BOEING BUSINESS JETS AERODYNAMICS TECHNOLOGY STATIC AEROELASTIC LOADS BOEING COMMERCIAL AIRPLANES BOEING COMMERCIAL AIRPLANES BOEING COMMERCIAL AIRPLANES TECHNOLOGY/PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT AERO 16 vertical height of the lifting system (i.e., increasing the length of the TE that sheds the vortices). The winglets increase the spread of the vortices along the TE, creating more lift at the wingtips (figs. 2 and 3). The result is a reduction in induced drag (fig. 4). The maximum benefit of the induced drag reduction depends on the spanwise lift distribution on the wing. Theoretically, for a planar wing, induced drag is opti- mized with an elliptical lift distribution that minimizes the change in vorticity along the span. For the same amount of structural material, nonplanar wingtip 737-800 TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS devices can achieve a similar induced drag benefit as a planar span increase; however, new Boeing airplane designs Passengers focus on minimizing induced drag with 3-class configuration Not applicable The 737-800 commercial airplane wingspan influenced by additional 2-class configuration 162 is one of four 737s introduced BBJ TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS The Boeing Business Jet design benefits. 1-class configuration 189 in the late 1990s for short- to (BBJ) was launched in 1996 On derivative airplanes, performance Cargo 1,555 ft3 (44 m3) medium-range commercial air- Passengers Not applicable as a joint venture between can be improved by using wingtip Boeing and General Electric.
  • [4910-13-P] DEPARTMENT of TRANSPORTATION Federal

    [4910-13-P] DEPARTMENT of TRANSPORTATION Federal

    This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 05/13/2021 and available online at federalregister.gov/d/2021-10015, and on govinfo.gov [4910-13-P] DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2021-0366; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00080-T] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; ATR – GIE Avions de Transport Régional Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2020-23-13, which applies to all ATR – GIE Avions de Transport Régional Model ATR42-200, -300, and -320 airplanes. AD 2020-23-13 requires a one-time inspection for discrepancies of the wire bundles between the left- and right-hand angle of attack (AOA) probes and the crew alerting computer, and, depending on findings, applicable corrective actions. Since the FAA issued AD 2020-23-13, a wiring modification for the captain stick shaker has been developed, along with an update to the aircraft flight manual (AFM). This proposed AD would continue to require the actions in AD 2020-23-13. This proposed AD would also require, for certain airplanes, modifying the captain stick shaker wiring, and for all airplanes, revising the existing AFM and applicable corresponding operational procedures to incorporate procedures for the stick pusher/shaker, as specified in a European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is proposed for incorporation by reference. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products. DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by [INSERT DATE 45 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].
  • Airplane Icing

    Airplane Icing

    Federal Aviation Administration Airplane Icing Accidents That Shaped Our Safety Regulations Presented to: AE598 UW Aerospace Engineering Colloquium By: Don Stimson, Federal Aviation Administration Topics Icing Basics Certification Requirements Ice Protection Systems Some Icing Generalizations Notable Accidents/Resulting Safety Actions Readings – For More Information AE598 UW Aerospace Engineering Colloquium Federal Aviation 2 March 10, 2014 Administration Icing Basics How does icing occur? Cold object (airplane surface) Supercooled water drops Water drops in a liquid state below the freezing point Most often in stratiform and cumuliform clouds The airplane surface provides a place for the supercooled water drops to crystalize and form ice AE598 UW Aerospace Engineering Colloquium Federal Aviation 3 March 10, 2014 Administration Icing Basics Important Parameters Atmosphere Liquid Water Content and Size of Cloud Drop Size and Distribution Temperature Airplane Collection Efficiency Speed/Configuration/Temperature AE598 UW Aerospace Engineering Colloquium Federal Aviation 4 March 10, 2014 Administration Icing Basics Cloud Characteristics Liquid water content is generally a function of temperature and drop size The colder the cloud, the more ice crystals predominate rather than supercooled water Highest water content near 0º C; below -40º C there is negligible water content Larger drops tend to precipitate out, so liquid water content tends to be greater at smaller drop sizes The average liquid water content decreases with horizontal
  • Wing Load and Angle of Attack Identification by Integrating Optical

    Wing Load and Angle of Attack Identification by Integrating Optical

    applied sciences Article Wing Load and Angle of Attack Identification by Integrating Optical Fiber Sensing and Neural Network Approach in Wind Tunnel Test Daichi Wada * and Masato Tamayama Aeronautical Technology Directorate, Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, 6-13-1 Osawa, Mitaka-shi, Tokyo 181-0015, Japan; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +81-50-3362-5566 Received: 18 March 2019; Accepted: 2 April 2019; Published: 8 April 2019 Abstract: The load and angle of attack (AoA) for wing structures are critical parameters to be monitored for efficient operation of an aircraft. This study presents wing load and AoA identification techniques by integrating an optical fiber sensing technique and a neural network approach. We developed a 3.6-m semi-spanned wing model with eight flaps and bonded two optical fibers with 30 fiber Bragg gratings (FBGs) each along the main and aft spars. Using this model in a wind tunnel test, we demonstrate load and AoA identification through a neural network approach. We input the FBG data and the eight flap angles to a neural network and output estimated load distributions on the eight wing segments. Thereafter, we identify the AoA by using the estimated load distributions and the flap angles through another neural network. This multi-neural-network process requires only the FBG and flap angle data to be measured. We successfully identified the load distributions with an error range of −1.5–1.4 N and a standard deviation of 0.57 N. The AoA was also successfully identified with error ranges of −1.03–0.46◦ and a standard deviation of 0.38◦.
  • Upwind Sail Aerodynamics : a RANS Numerical Investigation Validated with Wind Tunnel Pressure Measurements I.M Viola, Patrick Bot, M

    Upwind Sail Aerodynamics : a RANS Numerical Investigation Validated with Wind Tunnel Pressure Measurements I.M Viola, Patrick Bot, M

    Upwind sail aerodynamics : A RANS numerical investigation validated with wind tunnel pressure measurements I.M Viola, Patrick Bot, M. Riotte To cite this version: I.M Viola, Patrick Bot, M. Riotte. Upwind sail aerodynamics : A RANS numerical investigation validated with wind tunnel pressure measurements. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, Elsevier, 2012, 39, pp.90-101. 10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2012.10.004. hal-01071323 HAL Id: hal-01071323 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01071323 Submitted on 8 Oct 2014 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. I.M. Viola, P. Bot, M. Riotte Upwind Sail Aerodynamics: a RANS numerical investigation validated with wind tunnel pressure measurements International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 39 (2013) 90–101 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2012.10.004 Keywords: sail aerodynamics, CFD, RANS, yacht, laminar separation bubble, viscous drag. Abstract The aerodynamics of a sailing yacht with different sail trims are presented, derived from simulations performed using Computational Fluid Dynamics. A Reynolds-averaged Navier- Stokes approach was used to model sixteen sail trims first tested in a wind tunnel, where the pressure distributions on the sails were measured.